J. Neil Schulman's two nonfiction books on Second Amendment matters cover the territory [a reader] describe(s) pretty well. For what it's worth, you're wrong, too, about the 18th century meaning of "regulated". Back then, it meant "adequately provided for" and even later, regulation meant "facilitation", not "interference" as it does today.
He makes an even more important point by consulting two well-thought-of grammarians. The phrase containing the words "regulated" and "militia" do not condition the rest of the article in any way. In fact, as you'll read, it actually works the other way. This may be the best argument ever, as people like Madison (who wrote the amendment) and Jefferson (for whom, essentially, it was written) were very careful with their words.
There were two types of militia back then: a government-sponsored "organized" militia into which men were often conscripted - the 15,000 troops that marched on Pittsburgh in 1794 were of this sort - and volunteer "unorganized" militia. Unfortunately, the general incompetence of the former has rubbed off historically to some extent on the latter, which actually had an excellent record. The best source on this is Jeffrey Rogers Hummell.
